Simple Examples of Irreducible Complexity - Evolution Impossible

originally posted by: TerraLiga
I’m pretty sure even I could do a better job at being convincing than the average creationist. They all have the same retarded mindset and arguments. It’s like Old Testament bible study actually rots the brain. It’s a fact the religious people have lower IQs but Jesus, they can at least try!

Show me where I have done such.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: TerraLiga

I know you know this. BUT for those just tuning in:

Coop and his buddies never provide citations to what they say. They might put a YouTube video, or if we are lucky a Pop Sci paper. But never an actual citation, to research they claim does this or that.

Maybe you haven't looked?
Maybe you were to busy talking about religion?
Hmmmm?

originally posted by: Quadrivium

Coop and his buddies never provide citations to what they say.

Yeah this is textbook libel. Here are multiple occasions where I've provided sources for what I was saying:

originally posted by: cooperton

Every experiment that has experimented with artificial selection is an attempt to evolve a species. None have succeeded, which you mistake as them never trying. Just like antibiotic resistance in microbes - they originally claimed to have evolved an organism, but the trait was actually reversible in just a few generations, demonstrating it was not evolution.

antibiotic resistance is quickly reversible

originally posted by: cooperton

2,3-BPG is no easy protein to code for either. It is over 750 base pairs (citation) (DNA units) in length.

originally posted by: cooperton

peptide bonds are by definition non-spontaneous, because they require ATP... Spontaneous reactions don't require external energy. Non-spontaneous reactions do. A Peptide bond is a dehydration synthesis reaction:

"A dehydration synthesis is an endergonic (or 'energy in') type of reaction that cannot take place without the input of energy from somewhere else. It is non-spontaneous, and by the second law of thermodynamics will not take place on its own."

source

Stop lying.

a reply to: Quadrivium

Neighbour, I have looked. Papers when posted are generally not papers on the subject.

Oh but thanks for confirming that you are part of a little group, trying to push the agenda. Ta

I am still awaiting these proofs of Irreducible Complexity, I asked early on, and here we are with replies that amount to "Because Stone Cold Jehovah said so" as opposed to "here is the scientific proof".

As I said, I hope your Ulster is good to get the next bit.

Slan Leat

a reply to: cooperton

None of those are actually saying what you said they say. Which if you had an education in science you would know.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Quadrivium

Neighbour, I have looked. Papers when posted are generally not papers on the subject.

Oh but thanks for confirming that you are part of a little group, trying to push the agenda. Ta

I am still awaiting these proofs of Irreducible Complexity, I asked early on, and here we are with replies that amount to "Because Stone Cold Jehovah said so" as opposed to "here is the scientific proof".

As I said, I hope your Ulster is good to get the next bit.

Slan Leat

Agian, you are as lost as last years Easter egg..
Wrong person and wrong thread.

a reply to: Quadrivium

Oh no, Not wrong person.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: cooperton

None of those are actually saying what you said they say. Which if you had an education in science you would know.

Which one didn't?

this citation clearly states that antibiotic resistance is quickly reversible, which was my point

this citation clearly talks about the number of protein residues present on 2,3-BPG, which I used to source my claim of how many base pairs it involved.

this citation discusses the science of spontaneous reactions and supported my claim about spontaneity.



You're lying. We do support what we say with relevant citations.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Quadrivium

Oh no, Not wrong person.

Ok, use your PhD and your meaningless research to show me where you have asked me about proof of Irreducible Complexity.
I.will wait.

a reply to: cooperton

No, the experiments you are referring to are designed to track genomic and biological change in an organism through successive generations, not create new species as you have continually claimed.

I will read the paper you have linked another time.

a reply to: Quadrivium

You don't even know what my research is I really hope you don't get anything that its supposed to help with. Or do you think Pharmaceuticals just magically get made?

Anyway.

This is about the third (probably more) time coop or one of the cultists has tried this tactic. I've asked it repeatedly. So no. When one of them shows proof. Then we move on.

Slan leat

a reply to: TerraLiga

this is because they don't know the point of Bioinformatics (including Genomics). They don't get that one can study evolution quite nicely, with that.

Indeed to "create a new species in the lab" is the opposite of evolution. Its forcing something.

But hey that is their thing right? Their little ego filled deity, is just a scientist, creating things.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Quadrivium

You don't even know what my research is

I really hope you don't get anything that its supposed to help with. Or do you think Pharmaceuticals just magically get made?

Anyway.

This is about the third (probably more) time coop or one of the cultists has tried this tactic. I've asked it repeatedly. So no. When one of them shows proof. Then we move on.

Slan leat

Dude. You are SO confused.
Just hush.
You are embarrassing yourself.

a reply to: Noinden

I guess right now you are looking for something you can't find, eh?

You so funny.

a reply to: Noinden

You should be concerned with your own lies pretender...

Can you answer this question?
At approximately element 173 it becomes almost impossible based on its sequence and environment to predict the tertiary secondary and quaternary structure of a polyribonucleic acid sequence?
What RNA process is this question dealing with?
What are the electrons doing that makes this prediction a problem?

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Unsepttrium? That has something to do with genetics?

a reply to: Phage

I’m not asking what the element is...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Just making sure we're talking about the same thing.
And what does it have to do with genetics?

a reply to: Phage

I didn’t realize we were talking about what it has to do with genetics I thought I was presenting Noinden with a problem to answer...